Q: When determining geographic allocation of a portfolio, is it more appropriate to categorize a company based on where the majority of they business is transacted rather than where they are domiciled?
For example, is New Flyer better classified as US for geographic allocation purposes since 90% of their revenue currently comes from the US, or BAM.A as international since 90.4% of their assets under management are outside of Canada and spread across the world?
Also along these lines, is it worth the (very small) effort to sub-allocate companies that have meaningful exposure to more than one broad geographic area, e.g. classify approx. 1/2 of BNS as Canadian and 1/2 as emerging markets based on their business operations?
I ask this in the context of your previous comments that a 45%/35%/15%/5% CAD/US/INTL/EM allocation is appropriate for an average Canadian investor. Thanks as always for your sapient and perspicuous advice!
For example, is New Flyer better classified as US for geographic allocation purposes since 90% of their revenue currently comes from the US, or BAM.A as international since 90.4% of their assets under management are outside of Canada and spread across the world?
Also along these lines, is it worth the (very small) effort to sub-allocate companies that have meaningful exposure to more than one broad geographic area, e.g. classify approx. 1/2 of BNS as Canadian and 1/2 as emerging markets based on their business operations?
I ask this in the context of your previous comments that a 45%/35%/15%/5% CAD/US/INTL/EM allocation is appropriate for an average Canadian investor. Thanks as always for your sapient and perspicuous advice!